Mapping Modern Kinship Networks

First Results from the KINMATRIX Survey


Marcel Raab
on behalf of the KINMATRIX team


The KINMATRIX Team

Thomas Leopold
Thomas Leopold
PI; University of Cologne
Charlotte C. Becker
Charlotte C. Becker
GESIS Cologne
Beyda Çineli
Beyda Çineli
UAB/CED Barcelona
Marcel Raab
Marcel Raab
ifb Bamberg
Zafer Büyükkeçeci
Zafer Büyükkeçeci
MPDR Rostock

ERC indicating funding by European Union

Why study kinship?

The kinship network

Motivation

“At this point, we can say very little about the workings of kinship networks because we do not really possess data on the scope of interactions and the way that they are used”

— Frank F. Furstenberg (JMF 2020 - The Decade in Review)

  • Integration in a kinship network: Basic to human life & society
  • Bilineal multigroup kin networks: Uniquely human and universal in humans
  • Research on family relationships:
    • Little on extended/horizontal kin
    • Little on kinship lines
    • Little on non-Western contexts
  • Reasons: Rise of the household survey, time constraints in multipurpose surveys, ignorance

Research questions &
operationalization

Research questions

  1. What is the importance of nuclear, extended, and complex kin, considering both the relative strength of ties (“quality”) and the absolute strength in numbers (“quantity”) provided by different kinship types?

  2. How does the importance of nuclear, extended, and complex kin vary between maternal and paternal lines?

  3. How do these patterns differ across countries?

Outcomes studied

Retrospective view
The family as a locus of attachment, nurturance, socialization, and transmission
importance

Present-day view
The family as a source of social integration
geographic proximity & contact frequency

Prospective view
The family as a latent matrix/safety net
support potential

Retrospective view | Importance

Present-day view | Closeness and contact

Prospective view | Safety net

Results

A first glance at the data

Importance of family members 1

Importance of family members 2

  • Matrilineal tilt in kin importance close to universal across kin types & countries

  • Stronger in relations to female kin

A hierarchy of the importance of family members

Kinship type: paternal vs. maternal side
% deemed
important
Paternal side Maternal side


Mother 85-90%
Father

70-80%

Brother, Sister
60-70%


Maternal grandmother 45-55%
Paternal grandmother
Maternal grandfather 30-45%
Paternal grandfather
Maternal aunt 25-35%


Maternal uncle 15-30%
Paternal aunt, Paternal uncle
Maternal cousin 10-20%
Paternal cousin

5-15%

Relative ratings, conditional on presence, ignoring numbers quality vs. quantity

An absolute view of important family members

  • In absolute terms (intensity * numbers) extended kin are as important as nuclear kin
  • Limitation: Crude intensity measure

Conclusion

Conclusion 1

Extended kin are central to younger adults’ lives

  • At least half of the family members they are emotionally close to, regularly contact, and deem important
    Matter more than what previous data & research could capture
  • Their strength is in the numbers (“network strength” vs. “dyadic strength”)

Conclusion 2

Kinship networks are matrilineally tilted

  • Maternal kin are emotionally closer, more frequently contacted, considered more important, and more supportive
  • Explanations: Kinkeeping roles, tie strength (esp. mother-daughter, sister-sister), rise of divorce and separation
  • Western kinship is distinctly female-oriented

Conclusion 3

Cross-national similarity in 1 and 2, and some notable differences

  • US and Sweden show elevated importance of extended and complex kin
  • Italy shows higher social integration with nuclear and extended kin

Full paper

     Data available here

  marcelraab.de

  marcel.raab@ifb.uni-bamberg.de